Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Crazy Aido

Rolling opinion thread of WHFRP 3.

Recommended Posts

Congzilla said:

Peacekeeper_b said:

for the type of role players we are, which is the generation of role players who dont need fancy dice, doo dads and scales to run a fun enjoyable game.

 

Don't fall off that high horse, we wouldn't want to see you bruise your ego.

Sorry for sounding so arrogant. Wasnt the intention.

Was just replying to Commoner's statement that the 3E was far superior than 1E/2E/40KRPGs and was trying to state that "this statement was a matter of opinion, the same as my group's opinion that 2E/40KRPG are better than the new bells and whistles."

Believe me I understand that everyone has their own tastes and favorites. For me, I like the simplicity of not using cards and special dice. And to me they are new-fangled devices (didnt have them with my for red box of D&D, thus in my old cranky mind they are new LOL).

I just dont like absolutes. I prefer to see things like "In my opinion" or "from what we have seen". And so forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peacekeeper_b said:

Congzilla said:

 

Peacekeeper_b said:

for the type of role players we are, which is the generation of role players who dont need fancy dice, doo dads and scales to run a fun enjoyable game.

 

Don't fall off that high horse, we wouldn't want to see you bruise your ego.

 

 

Sorry for sounding so arrogant. Wasnt the intention.

Was just replying to Commoner's statement that the 3E was far superior than 1E/2E/40KRPGs and was trying to state that "this statement was a matter of opinion, the same as my group's opinion that 2E/40KRPG are better than the new bells and whistles."

Believe me I understand that everyone has their own tastes and favorites. For me, I like the simplicity of not using cards and special dice. And to me they are new-fangled devices (didnt have them with my for red box of D&D, thus in my old cranky mind they are new LOL).

I just dont like absolutes. I prefer to see things like "In my opinion" or "from what we have seen". And so forth.

I can agree with that.  I started with the same red box set, crayon and all, so I know where your coming from.  There is no right or wrong way to play make believe.  For me the fun of WFRP 3e is simply that it is a new fresh way to play make believe.  I have been impressed for the most part by how quickly the components fall to the background once everyone at the table understands them.  In the begining I would have to help everyone build their dice pool and explain converting stance die, now I simply say make a 2d strength check and they know that by 2d I mean 2 challenge dice. Or if I say a 1 by 2 agility check they know I mean 1 challenge and 2 misfortune.  Some things on the DM side I have found easier to track with pencil and paper like monster HP,  15 tokens piled on a card gets hard to count. 

I play a lot of games and every system has ups and down, non are perfect.  This one has a lot going for it, to me it allows real old school character centric roleplaying more so than any system since the old Dragonlance SAGA system.  I shouldn't say allows it, roleplaying isn't effected by system, but it seems more built around it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peacekeeper_b said:

commoner said:

 

 Simply, this mechanic is leagues beyond what the old 2e system did (except for the speed of combat) and the dice are way more interesting than standard dice.    

 

 

Personal opinion Commoner. And in my personal opinion you are wrong about that. 2E/1E/40KRPG for me and my group are far superior and open systems that are more appealing, appeasing and satisfying for the type of role players we are, which is the generation of role players who dont need fancy dice, doo dads and scales to run a fun enjoyable game.

 

 

aplauso.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

which is the generation of role players who dont need fancy dice, doo dads and scales to run a fun enjoyable game

gui%C3%B1o.gif

Since I'm in this generation, apparently, I have to say that while I can have, and have had, fun playing many RPGs without the "fancy dice, doo dads, and scales", WFRP3e is the best RPG, and most fun, system I have experienced in my 30ish years of playing and GMing.   That's not to say that I don't enjoy or play/run other RPGs, such as the 40k ones.  I find that WFRP3e allows a lot more freedom of choice for actions and handling situations than every other RPG though.

For instance, previous WFRP and the 40k RPGs have "Standard Attack, Swift Attack, Lightning Attack, Charge" actions and that's about it for melee.  Boring.  WFRP has a bunch of action cards that do a large variety of results.  Besides being evocative of what is being done, players can easily do different actions every turn.  No more "Lightning attack, lightning attack, lightning attack, etc."  As a GM, I can adjust and award Fortune points for good roleplaying and for players describing their attack (or saying something appropriate while doing it).  I can award misfortune dice for various environmental issues, without needing to worry about percentage values and limits.  The story drives the game, not the mechanics, as I see it and have played it.  The bits and dice and cards all help to make the game easier to play, so that look-up and handling time is minimal, again to focus on the story.  I don't NEED fancy dice, doo dads, and scales to run/play a fun and enjoyable game.  The WFRP3 fancy dice, doo dads, etc help to make the game fun and enjoyable, but WFRP3e would be enjoyable without those too (I would assume, since I and my group don't have an issue using or getting overwhelmed by them, so we use them all).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

commoner said:

The fact Deathwatch (a game I have been waiting for for 20 years) won't be on this system is the reason I won't be buying it.  Simply, this mechanic is leagues beyond what the old 2e system did (except for the speed of combat) and the dice are way more interesting than standard dice.    

Ah Peacekeeper we meet again.  I love how you take every statement out of context just to make your point.  Apparently, you have very little understanding of the english language or how language works.  Any statement made by anyone is a matter of opinion, period.  Doesn't matter what it is...saying the earth is round regardless of how many people say it is still just an opinion.  It does have the act inherently of invalidating someone who says the earth is flat, but that's simply the inherent nature of communication.  The paragraph I have quoted above also clearly demonstrates it is a matter of my personal opinion.  If you take the two sentences and reconstruct them the meaning reads as follows:  "I won't be buying deathwatch because the 3e mechanic is leagues beyond what the 2e system did."  The use of the noun I clearly states this relates to me, not the entire world or a panel of experts.  No paragraph change also explains this paragraph is dedicated to personal thoughts, as was the paragraph before it, so clearly, this was a matter of personal opinion.  

I know, from past posts with you, heaven forbid anyone criticize 2e.  Except, if you look at Deathwatch and actually have played 3e you'll find how the party can gain benefits or penalties based on how the characters interact to be the exact same thing as a party card, without all the amazing things a party card does such as party tension...it is a weak imitation.  The Missions as well could also be another avenue where 3e type design would have made it better because of the way the system relates together these narrative elements and the mechanics.  They aren't necessary no, but they certainly do help and add to the experience.  That's a few of the many reasons (which simply relate to the 3e mechanic) why I won't be buying it.  Just to clarify, to hold your hand through the complexities of English, this is personal opinion. 

Dvang my hat is off to you.  When I saw Warhammer  disappear from your icon list I thought you may have quit.  It's great to see you're still around and active at the boards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

commoner said:

Any statement made by anyone is a matter of opinion, period.  Doesn't matter what it is...saying the earth is round regardless of how many people say it is still just an opinion.

Um, that just doesn't make any sense.

"An opinion is a subjective statement or thought about an issue or topic, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts. An opinion may be supported by an argument, although people may draw opposing opinions from the same set of facts. Opinions rarely change without new arguments being presented. However, it can be reasoned that one opinion is better supported by the facts than another by analysing the supporting arguments."

If I say I have 10 fingers, or that WFRP comes in a card board box I am stating a fact not an opinion.  If everything was an opinion no one would have bothered inventing the word 'fact'.

"The word fact can refer to verified information about past or present circumstances or events which are presented as objective reality. In science, it means a provable concept."

Stating the Earth is round is a fact since it is a provable concept.  If some one played enough games of WFRP 2e and 3e with a set group of test subjects, they could theoretically prove as fact that one plays faster than the other.  They could never prove one is better or more fun than the other since that would be a subjective statement otherwise known as an opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congzilla said:

commoner said:

Any statement made by anyone is a matter of opinion, period.  Doesn't matter what it is...saying the earth is round regardless of how many people say it is still just an opinion.

 

Um, that just doesn't make any sense.

"An opinion is a subjective statement or thought about an issue or topic, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts. An opinion may be supported by an argument, although people may draw opposing opinions from the same set of facts. Opinions rarely change without new arguments being presented. However, it can be reasoned that one opinion is better supported by the facts than another by analysing the supporting arguments."

If I say I have 10 fingers, of that WFRP comes in a card board box I am stating a fact not an opinion.  If everything was an opinion no one would have bothered inventing the word 'fact'.

"The word fact can refer to verified information about past or present circumstances or events which are presented as objective reality. In science, it means a provable concept."

Stating the Earth is round is a fact since it is a provable concept.  If some one played enough games of WFRP 2e and 3e with a set group of test subjects, they could theoretically prove as fact that one plays faster than the other.  They could never prove one is better or more fun than the other since that would be a subjective statement otherwise known as an opinion.

Honestly, this is not the place for this debate and is a complex philosophical issue, but I'll give you the high points. 

Yes it is currently a fact is the earth is round.  Two thousand years ago the consensus fact was created by a system of verification by board of very expert minds that the earth was, indeed flat.  This viewpoint was a validated fact for a very long time until other, officially smart people came along and said after a series of validating tests that the earth is round.  Continuing exploration eventually shows how the earth is round.  So we assume today, based on evidence we now claim to be fact that it is a the earth is round.  However, that is our own perception of reality and does not necessarily mean our perception is true.  Throughout history, mankind has had many facts that were proven false.  Dinosaurs once evolved into reptiles and that was a fact.  In the 80's, the fact changed to birds. This is because facts are opinions the popular concensus agrees on at a given point of time, but are, by their innate nature no more true than saying the sky is pink.  Just as once upon a time human sacrifice was used to appease the gods for good harvests we now turn to bio-engineering to secure good harvests.  Obviously, in our modern age and based on the evidence we've seen, we have good harvests when the chemicals work, just as primitive man knew their sacrifices were working when they received "gifts" from their gods in the form of rain, quality earth and a good harvest.  Both facts are not necessarily true and both had underwent repeat testing and were validated by experts.  Which "fact" then is more accurate?  Of course this is only an assumption because in time, our current facts will be proven wrong and new facts will take their place.  This innately highlights the point that everything we think, do, or say is subjective.  For instance, in our current subjective reality of the European/American descent it is not okay to cannibalize our neighbors.  However, in other parts of the world it is okay and should be done.  Both are presented as facts and both people's largely disagree about the nature of those facts.  Just as I can like Warhammer 3e and find a thousand people who share my viewpoint, Peacekeeper can find a thousand others who share his viewpoint..  We both would regard our opinion as fact and be able to produce a large amount of information proving their point and disproving their opponent.  These varying views (historical, personal or scientific) happen because reality itself is subjective because we are continually limited by our perception.  A shared viewpoint is simply that and it becomes labeled Fact only by a concensus.  A board of experts may have more understanding to assert their opinion and indeed it is often the fault of the listener to assume it is a truthful assessment of "fact," but it carries no more validity than a group of dudes in their basement saying this is how the world works.  We only assume "experts" have the right to govern our facts because in our subjective reality they have done time studying the world.  This is true, they have, but what they indeed have studied is a collective opinions and assumptions that have been asserted by popular opinion to be true (or facts) when the basis of all study is merely a look into an individual's perceptions of phenomenons pertaining to life.  Verification is in itself faulty since all verification is fundamentally influenced by the subjective viewpoint.  And our system of verification has been used for good or ill for millenia and it will not change, and will continue to change as facts are born and die each year.   If you don't 100% believe me and actually care to learn more about it, I suggest you read some post-modern theory.  It is very fascinating stuff.  

Anyway, so this doesn't get deleted, I personally enjoy this game and find it to be a very stimulating game.  While I agree there are a few shortcomings with the system I find that with every system.  I will say Dvang's point of how the system influences the narrative game and the two work in tangent with each other is absolutely spot on.  I play with a very experienced group of narrativist roleplayers and we all played red-box or whatever other form of valid proof I need of my experience to say I have the right to say this (lol) and I find this system has taken our role-playing in all kinds of new and fun directions.  I find them pushed to engage the story more with this system than any others.  Just the other night, after witnessing the death of his father, one of my character's became overcome with grief.  He could hardly go on and found everything to be a struggle.  He was role-playing this, but I decided to give him a stress a two that he could not get rid of during rally steps, to reflect the exhaustion he was experiencing.  He fully accepted it and found that it helped us tell the story even mechanically and brought up in his role-play in simply how he played events out to reflect the actual pain he was feeling in the limits of what he could perform in a round. This system truly amazes me each time I play it and I'm endlessly searching for new discoveries or new ways to use the system to augment our stories and push them farther.  I never did that with any RPG, never like I have with this one, and I have to say it's absolutely thrilling.  But again, it's a matter of how you play it and what you try to get out of it, which we have.  

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Commoner, that is great example of mechanics and story / roleplaying working together, which is one of 3e's strengths in my opinion.  I had a nice line showing the falacy of the huge paragraph above it but the one below made it all worth reading gran_risa.gif so I won't bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Row, row row your boat...

First, always nice to hear from Peacekeeper_b happy.gif

and second, blah!  who needs philosophy commoner?lengua.gif  we have science and the simpsons these days. Works for me. And one day science will invent magic.

 

I find warhammer 2e still to be better than 3e. Mostly beacuse of the vast material available to 2e. 3e still lacks the depth and colour that I know is the warhammer world. But eventually I think that will change, depending on how FFG is going to support the game. I am going to shelve wfrp 3 once we finnish The gathering Storm (which was a big dissapointment), and set course for the Koronus expanse for some exciting space adventures in the excellent Rogue Trader. 

I think wfrp 3 will be a great game, it just needs time to grow.

 

Good gaming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mal Reynolds said:

I find warhammer 2e still to be better than 3e. Mostly beacuse of the vast material available to 2e.

 

Well yeah, but 3e has been out for less than a year. Of course it's lacking in the amount of stuff that exists for it.

Personally I think 1e is better than 2e for exactly this reason. Nothing can hold a candle to some of the brilliant stuff that has been published for 1e. And if you count Warpstone, then really quite an enormous lot has been published for 1e.

But the system of 1e sucked, and I really really like the twist that 3e gave to roleplaying. I have no idea yet whether it's a short-lived gimmick or a revolution for the entire hobby, but I'm eager to give it a fair chance. 3e certainly has its fair share of downsides, but also a lot of really interesting upsides. Upsides that wouldn't be possible in a different system. And I think many of the downsides can be ironed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geez, I didn't even realize somehow WFRP got dropped from my profile.  How odd. sorpresa.gif  Thanks for pointing that out!

All better now! gran_risa.gif

I've been pretty busy recently, both work and doing after-work construction on my house, so my time to game (and post) has been fairly limited the past few months.

Yes, WFRP3 will only get better with time.  It is a bit lacking in materials to an extent (like careers) compared to 1e and 2e.  As pointed out, it's still really new though.  Just give it some time, FFG is obviously putting a lot of effort into this product and constantly coming out with additional material for it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point in 3e's life cycle my biggest complaint would be lack of information released on future products.  Right now they are announcing stuff two months out at most, whereas Wizards has posted what D&D products will be out all the way to 2011.  I think some people who are holding off to see if their favorite stuff from previous editions will come out for it where if it was at least announced they may be more likely to adopt the new version knowing that in 8 months or whatever the thing they are waiting for will be out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congzilla said:

 

At this point in 3e's life cycle my biggest complaint would be lack of information released on future products.

 

 

Yes, it would be nice to get another teaser document similar to the one that we had – some kind of storytelling by Herr Klugge or whatever the name of that sneaky Grey Wizard was… gui%C3%B1o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you commoner for your ease of leading me through the maze of the english language, something I obviously dont understand. And it is nice to see you once again back down and reverse your statements when approached about fact vs opinion.

Back to my original statement, which had nothing to do with your reasons or not buying Deathwatch. I will probably not buy that game either, as I am not interested in Space Marines at all. But was about the declaration that 3E was the best ever.

It may be. I havent found it to be the best ever, you know, when I read the rules or played the game. In fact, I found it kinda boring, but I will agree my 2E die hardness does get in the way. The indication there, being written in english, is that I FOUND IT BORING AND KINDA LACKING. It doesnt meant it is boring of kind of lacking, it just was for me.

I will not sit here and tell you that 2E is the Gods Balls of RPGs, afterall, even for me it isnt. (Im a DC Heroes man myself) and I have lots of issues with the 40KRPGs so far.

I was only stating that your statement was a matter of opinion. And in the opinion of my group, as they state it, they dont need the bells and whistles, just the dice and pencils. So I suppose I only responded to your post because I just wanted to point out that you stated a opinion not fact. Maybe I shouldnt have posted.

But then, I didnt include any personal insults in my posts against you. A action you seem to not have issues with.

So, in my most cheerful and honest and polite way of saying this...

Get stuffed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dvang said:

It was funny, though. happy.gif

I might not agree with Peacekeeper's views on WFRP, but he can be funny. gran_risa.gif

Thanks dvang.

Now lets put that all behind us and get back to topic.

What was the topic again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peacekeeper_b said:

dvang said:

 

It was funny, though. happy.gif

I might not agree with Peacekeeper's views on WFRP, but he can be funny. gran_risa.gif

 

 

Thanks dvang.

Now lets put that all behind us and get back to topic.

What was the topic again?

I believe it was about flaming people for criticizing 3e without having played 3e.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bindlespin said:

the irony of the guy who is acting like a total **** asking everyone to get back on topic is pretty amusing happy.gif 

Yes it is. I may be a total **** at times, but Im not unreasonable.

I beleive the original topic was about how someone got the game, he and his group were not super excited by it and then the poster listed the pros and cons as he saw it and stated he was going to play and would post more about how the game turned out to either A) prove his misgivings or B) surprise him and change his initial view of the game.

And then the flame war began.

If you call it a flame war. To me its the old sour milk issue. You know the one where someone thinks the milk is sour buy smell and then someone says "try it anyway, it might not be sour." A lot of initial RPG excitement and feel is from the appearance, first impression of the game. For example, I love MERP but despise Rolemaster overall. Why? They are pretty my 80% the same game. The reason being, MERP was based on a beloved series of books I read and was better edited, had a nicer layout and was easier to use, whereas RM was pretty clunky, cumbersome and had millions of companions. Of course this is all personal opinion. Others liked the more mathematical and analytical appearance of RM and the less strignant setting (i.e. you made your own) and more versatile characters. Others loved the endless variety of criticals and combat charts. Others hate the long math involved combat system.

So I was a huge MERP fan. When the next Lord of the Rings RPG came out people told me to get it anyway, I mean afterall, you are a LotR fan. But by then I was pretty much a fan of the MERP system and that is what I would want to use to play a Middle Earth campaign. That same feeling exists for WFRP. To me the 2E and 1E systems at heart was what made that game that game. Of course I understand some of the career and progression aspects still exist. And overall I am not a huge fan of the dice system in 3E, but I am not a fool, I know this doesnt interfer with the Role Play aspects of a game and from what I hear lots of people enjoy that system. I have always steered away from symbolic dice sustems. Star Wars D6, sure, D6 Legend System hell no!

Same goes for the cybernetic punker genre of RPGs. I prefer the addition system of Cyberpunk (stat+skill+D10) over the dice pool system of Shadowrun. Its why I cant get into Hollow Earth Expedition (despite loving the genre and books) or Witch Hunter RPGs. Maybe it is my limited ability as a player or DM/GM but I see it more as a personal preference.

But I try not to push that on other people. My opinions are only self reflections, and my group has similar feelings. Could be upbringing, past experiences and so forth.

So back to the main topic, why are we angry at people who dont like this game? Sure, maybe they shouldnt post here. But maybe they should. Maybe they love the setting, see something in the game they like and are hoping to see new additions or changes or errata that makes the game more flexible to them or more appealing to them. And maybe they hope that by talking and sharing with fans (pro or con) of the game they can expand their enjoyment, understanding or even disinterest in the game. This isnt a forum only about playing the game, its a forum about the game. The good, the bad, the future, the past, the experiences and so forth.

I am interested on how the game progresses. Maybe I will take a second look and try at it once newer ideas, publications are released.  Maybe they will release or cover something new that was never touched before, like Estalia or Tilea or a Ork Sourcebook that will interest me. Maybe I like to read about other peoples experiences, views and ideas on the game. And maybe some time I feel like being a total **** and calling someone or something out. In the end, 1E and 2E and 3E are all good games, or else they wouldnt have endured, matured, altered, revised and existed for as long as they have. We can all have our favorites, we can all have our dislikes. But we should never be absolute. Dedicated, yes. Not interested in testing the "sour" milk, sure. But we should never say someone esle is wrong for preferring what we thought was "sour" milk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people should cut Peacekeeper some slack.  While he's obviously insane for not liking WFRP3e as much as some of us gran_risa.gif (note: just teasing gui%C3%B1o.gif ), he's usually very urbane and tempered in his con-WFRP3e posts from what I've seen.  He admitted that what he is saying is *his opinion*, and that it doesn't mean the game itself is bad, just not for him and his group.  Granted, things get/got a little bit out of hand on both sides, and even he isn't immune to perhaps choosing the wrong word to in his reply.  However, there is no need to keep commenting on it.  Peacekeeper tried to move on (I thought his comment was funny, as I said), but people yanked it back into personal-land.  Please, everyone let it go.

To topic, we've seen many topics like this posted before.  Some people are tired of them, and tired of saying the same thing in reply each time, which probably makes some of the answers a bit terser and/or sound more snooty than intended:

Yes it has lots of pieces, and might look like a boardgame when you open it and see all the stuff.  When you play actually play the game, though, you'll realize it is nothing like a boardgame.  It really is a solid RPG.

It's more RP-oriented than any and every D&D game I've ever played in 30+ years.  It does justice to WFRP, and in my experience, facilitates more roleplaying than WFRP1 or 2 did (and those were/are great games).  I previously always said that WFRP2e was the best RPG I've ever played/seen.  WFRP3e edged it out.  Yes, there are some things that can make it better (mainly, more expansion stuff like careers), but at its core the game focuses on the story. It might not be for you (like with Peacekeeper), but the bottom line is that you really cannot make an informed opinion until you've played it a couple times. Throwing up a post on the boards, without having even played the game, will of course cause people to tell you to play it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I agree with dvang, Peacekeeper have as much right as everyone else to post his opinions. He is also one of 2e-people that have actually tried 3e (from what I've understood) before giving critique so I really don't see why you're all so defensive. His first post was a bit arrogant (I almost posted an annoyed reply to it), but he did apologize for that, continuing flaming him serves absolutely no purpose but to scare other people away from this forum.

As to whether one is "allowed" to have opinions on the game before actually trying. Why not? The original poster admitted that he hadn't tried the game, but only read through it, no need to get upset or rude about it. Pointing out his misconceptions and giving him some advice on how to make the system better for him would have been enough, instead we've got this big thread filled with the same old discussion we've had a zillion times before. We (the 3e community) really have to relax a bit and try to be less defensive of the game we all like enough to hang around here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...